ArticleJMIR research protocols2025
Identifying Optimal Testing Modalities to Increase COVID-19 Testing Access in Baltimore, Maryland: Protocol for a Household Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in JMIR research protocols, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic disproportionately affected low-income and racial and ethnic minority populations. Testing plays a critical role in disrupting disease transmission, but complex barriers prevent optimal testing access, particularly for Black and Latinx communities. There is limited evidence regarding the optimal testing modalities to increase testing access for these populations.
objectiveThis study aimed to define the optimal COVID-19 testing modalities for maximizing testing acceptance, uptake, and timeliness of receipt of results.
methodsThe Community Collaboration to Combat COVID-19 (C-FORWARD) trial was a household randomized comparative effectiveness trial conducted in a representative sample of an urban population. Households across 653 census block groups were sampled using a probability proportional to size approach. The primary outcome was the completion of SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19 testing within 30 days of randomization.
resultsBetween February 2021 and December 2022, a total of 1083 individuals were enrolled, including 881 (81.35%) index participants and 202 (18.65%) household members. The mean age of participants was 51 (SD 18) years.Of the total sample, 43% (n=460) of participants identified as Black or African American, 48.6% (n=526) as White, and 9% (n=91) as other, including Asian, American Indian, Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and multiple races; 4.8% (n=48) of participants identified as Hispanic or Latino. At the time of enrollment, 51.1% (n=553) were currently working either full time or part time, and 32.9% (n=342) of participants had an advanced degree. In total, 80% (n=809) of participants had been tested for COVID-19 previously, with 22.3% (n=179) reporting a prior positive test for COVID-19, and 86.8% (n=890) reporting receiving at least one COVID-19 vaccination before enrollment.
conclusionsData from the C-FORWARD trial will be used to address important questions regarding COVID-19 testing acceptance and uptake in an urban population. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/68600.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.